Morphology – Is ‘A Pair of Words Formed with Prefixes That Convey the Same Meaning’ Ambiguous

morphologyprefixes

I was asked to choose, between two options, the correct. The question:

A pair of words formed with prefixes that convey the same
meaning is
( x ) inside/intimate
( ✓ ) impossible/discourage

It's claimed that the answer was the second one because both "im" and "dis" hold similar contrary meaning. Nevertheless, at a first glance, I didn't even hesitate to choose the first option, because, unlike the second alternative, they have prefixes "in" and the word "intimate" is certainly related to something from "inside".

My confusion comes from the fact that the question structure is utterly ambiguous, since either "a pair of words" or the "prefixes" can convey the same meaning.

How can I properly argue, based on grammar or concrete references, that the ambiguity present in the question: A pair of words formed with prefixes that convey the same meaning confuses readers and makes two possible answers if there were?

Best Answer

If I understand your argument, I'm afraid it won't hold up. You've edited to make it clear that your hope is that the wording of the question is open to interpretation. I think most people would understand the prompt to ask: "The words in which pair are formed from [a pair of] prefixes that have similar meanings?"

While it is true that the phrase A pair of words formed with prefixes that convey the same meaning could also be parsed as "A pair of words that convey the same meaning, which happen to be formed with prefixes," then we still have a few problems. One is that neither pair is a good pair of synonyms. Inside and intimate are related but not "the same meaning," and impossible and discourage are even more different. The other, simple problem is the plural form of the word "prefixes." A case can be made that inside and intimate share a "prefix," since the etymology of intimate shows it to be the superlative form of the PIE root in ... but even if that weren't a stretch (there's a difference between "formed with a [recognized English] prefix" and "derived, by way of Latin, from the same PIE root as that English prefix"), then it would be the same "prefix" for both, and the pair could not be described as "formed with prefixes."

Related Solutions

Learn English – How to differentiate between the meaning in the following words

Look them up in a dictionary. You can guess what a word might mean if you recognize its root and part of speech, but that would just be a guess.

It would be nice if there were some simple rules that you could say, "any word ending with -or means the person doing the thing", like "auditor" = "a person who audits", "creator" = "a person who creates", etc. But English isn't that simple, and I'd guess most other languages aren't either. A "janitor" is not a person who "janits", nor is a "boar" a person who "boes". Etc.

Negation – Can “Not” Replace Words with Negative Prefixes?

Often the "un" form is stronger than the not form.

               happy      neutral       sad
more happy <----------|------|------|--------->less happy

Unhappy is often roughly the same as "sad", but "not happy" could include "neutral" and "sad"

And there are things to watch out for:

You look not happy.

You don't look happy.

Only the second of these is idiomatic.

While you can be understood with "not ...", developing fluency means being confident with the un- in- dis- and other negating prefixes.

In short, it is unsafe to default to 'not' as your meaning could easily be misconstrued. It's also not a good habit to form for your long term progress.